The topic of the lecture and the passage is about altruism, both studying on human being and animals such as meerkat. However, the lecturer stated against the passage.

For meerkat, the one who acted as a guard got to eat before standing guard. So it was full, unlike the passage stressed that it was hungry when standing guard.

Also, when meerkat was studied closely, according to the lecturer, the meerkat was actually safer as guard than the others, because it was the first to know the danger and can flee away immediately. In addition, it guarded near the safe cave and was able to hide in it very quickly when it felt dangerous. Furthermore, when the guard alarmed the others, it would draw the predator's attention to the others, which usually huddled together or run around when alarmed. Thus, it was indeed safer to be a guard, which was controversial with the passage in the part where it demonstrated that guard was more dangerous because it had to flee alone and others can fend off a predator together.

In the case of human being, an extreme example from the lecture was that a person who donated his/her kidney actually gained a lot, one can be appreciated by the people one saved and the people around, even from the society. Therefore, donating, which seemed to be analtruistic act, might as-a-matter-of-factly be quite beneficial to the person who did it.